OLCIS eNews – December 2025

Tuesday 23 December 2025

Welcome to the December edition of Logistics UK’s Operator Licensing Compliance Information Service (OLCIS) enews update. This document is a monthly round-up of transport news items sent out as part of your OLCIS subscription. Its objective is to keep you up to date with news affecting your commercial vehicle operation. To view previous editions and access your other subscription benefits, visit the dedicated OLCIS hub.

We welcome any comments and suggestions for new topics you would like to see included within OLCIS enews. Contact Customer Services with any feedback.

We would like to take this opportunity to wish all readers a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!

News round-up

New THINK! campaign warns of rising drug-driving dangers

The government-backed THINK! initiative has launched its first drug driving campaign in a decade, warning that “one poor decision can have devastating consequences.” Targeting young men aged 17–30, the campaign highlights shocking statistic that drug-related driver fatalities have risen 70% in the past 10 years, and nearly 27,000 convictions are made annually.

With the tagline “Don’t put drugs in the driving seat”, the campaign runs across social media, YouTube, TikTok, and outdoor ads this December, supported by police enforcement through Operation Limit. Officials stress the message which is clear:

“Drug driving destroys lives, and offenders will be caught”.

 New DVSA Chief Executive announced

Beverley Warmington has been appointed as the new Chief Executive of the Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency (DVSA) to continue work to tackle the driving test backlog and lead the delivery of test booking reforms to cut waiting times.

The new CEO will bring almost two decades of public service expertise to the role. Beverley Warmington will join DVSA on 5 January 2026. She will take over from Loveday Ryder who led DVSA since January 2021.

DfT agrees with Logistics UK position on regulatory flexibility for zero-emission vehicles up to 4.25t

The government has published its response to the regulatory flexibility for vans consultation that closed in March 2025, which supports the position advocated by Logistics UK and its members.

The Department for Transport (DfT) has committed to introducing draft legislation, when Parliamentary time permits, to move ahead with the main considerations contained in the consultation, these are:

• Vehicle testing: DfT supports Logistics UK’s view that these zero-emission vehicles should be moved into scope of the class 7 MOT testing system (without adding features from the HGV test into the class 7 MOT), with a first test three years from registration (and then annually).
• Drivers’ hours and tachographs: DfT will explore options for moving these vans from assimilated drivers’ hours, into the scope of GB domestic hours.
• Speed limiters: there will be further consultation on the proposals to remove the mandatory requirement for speed limiters in zero-emission vehicles up to 4.25t.

DfT also acknowledged Logistics UK’s overall policy position of considering expanding the regulatory threshold of N1 up to 4.25t, as these vehicles are currently classed as N2 vehicles. This will form part of our continuing discussions on regulatory reform with the Department.

The full government response can be found here.

Top questions this month at the Member Advice Centre     

Q. What would happen if a driver completed their 35 hours of driver CPC training a year early?

A. Drivers who complete their 35 hours of periodic training prior to the fifth year of the training cycle will have the Driver Qualification Card (DQC) issued within the fifth year, on the anniversary of the completion of the periodic training.

This means that some drivers could then have a DQC with a validity of up to six years, which has caused some confusion. This card can be used immediately once it has been issued, and the old card does not have to be carried in addition to the new one.

In the scenario where a driver has a DQC with more than five years validity, caution should be paid to the fact that each individual module of periodic training has its own five-year period of validity.

For example, if a driver has a DQC valid from 1 May 2024 until 9 September 2029, a five-and-a-half-year period and completes their first module of periodic training in May 2024, they will have to complete 35 hours of periodic training by May 2029, despite the DQC being valid until September 2029.

If the driver did not complete their periodic training by May 2029, the first module they completed in May 2024 would be invalid, meaning another module of periodic training would be required before the DQC expires.

If your drivers still have periodic training modules to complete their 35 hours, look back to the dates and status of any previous courses to make sure they all fall within the five-year window, those that don’t show as invalid.

A driver that does not complete the required 35 hours of approved training within the allotted timeframe, whose DQC then expires, will not be able to drive a vehicle in scope of the CPC requirements until the training is completed.

Q. Some of our drivers operate primarily under the assimilated drivers’ hours rules but have recently been doing gritting work as well, under GB domestic rules. Can log books be used to record their activities?

A. Article 6(5) of EC561/2006 and Article 34 and 35 of EU 165/2014 make clear the acceptable methods. In any fixed weeks (commencing midnight Sunday/Monday) that a driver drives in scope of assimilated drivers’ hours rules, a tachograph record must be produced for every working day in that week. Clearly, on assimilated hours driving days the driver must use the tachograph equipment in the usual way.

EC rules take no account of domestic methods, but it would be acceptable to produce a legally kept GB domestic drivers’ hours logbook along with any other article 6(5) record that is required.

If a logbook is not legally required, then any work under GB domestic rules would have to be recorded in one of the three prescribed methods as mentioned in Article 6(5) and produced when stopped at a check. For non-driving duties or domestic rules driving, a record must be produced by one of the following methods:

• Written manually on a tachograph chart.
• Written manually on a digital tachograph printout.
• Made using the manual input facility of a digital tachograph.
• (In the UK only) for days where a driver has been subject to the domestic hours’ rules and a record is legally required, recorded in a domestic logbook.

Compliance news: around the courts

Background

An operator holds a standard national goods vehicle operator’s licence originally for four vehicles and four trailers. They became the transport manager on the licence when they obtained their transport manager CPC qualification. The operator is also sole director of another company which holds a restricted goods vehicle operator’s licence authorising two vehicles and two trailers.

Evidence

There had been previous adverse compliance history and a formal warning given by Traffic Commissioner for failings found. A public inquiry was conducted on further adverse findings for maintenance failures, and the repute of the operator was found to be severely tarnished. Consequently, the licence was curtailed to three vehicles and three trailers.

The operator again was called to a public inquiry for consideration of maintenance compliance failings and other issues. From these findings, the licence was curtailed by one vehicle for a period of 14 days, with an undertaking attached to the licence for an audit to be conducted. A proposal to revoke the licence commenced as the transport manager failed to comply with the undertaking given at the public inquiry. The transport manager was issued with a warning for ongoing maintenance compliance issues.

One of the operators vehicles was then issued with an “S” marked prohibition following a Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency (DVSA) roadside stop which found tyres with tread worn beyond the legal limit, an insecure load and tyres of different nominal sizes. The driver was also issued with a fixed penalty notice and received three penalty points for using the vehicle with a defective tyre.

This triggered a DVSA maintenance investigation by a Vehicle Examiner (VE) which found significant compliance failures in the operator’s maintenance systems and falsification of safety inspection records by the transport manager. When the VE asked for the vehicle safety inspection records during their maintenance inspection visit, the transport manager was unable to produce them and stated that they were kept at their home address. The VE arranged to meet the transport manager that evening to continue the questioning and to collect the safety inspection records from their home address. The transport manager ensured the VE that the maintenance provider was the one stated on the licence record and produced five safety inspection records for the vehicle stopped at the roadside. Upon reviewing the records that they had been given, the VE became suspicious about their authenticity.

The VE interviewed the maintenance provider who confirmed that their company had not carried out any maintenance on the operator’s vehicles for several years and confirmed that the inspection records in question were not signed by them. The maintenance provider also shared a text message with the VE that they had received from the transport manager, which included a request for fraudulent invoices in connection with the VE investigation. The text message was relevant as it openly confirmed that the transport manager had been undertaking fraudulent activity to cut down on costs. Additionally, it confirmed that the signatures were not the maintenance providers.

A formal witness statement was given. When the evidence was put to the transport manager, they admitted they had falsified the safety inspection records. They were prosecuted at the Magistrates’ Court as they pleaded guilty to five separate offences on numerous dates for falsifying inspection records relating to heavy goods vehicles with intent to deceive. The transport manager was sentenced.

The transport manager was then called to a public inquiry, as operator and transport manager, in view of their convictions for the offences of falsifying safety inspection records for HGVs with intent to deceive, and to explore the shortcomings identified by the DVSA in respect of both operations. Despite the deadline stated in the call up letters to the operator to submit financial evidence to the Office of the Traffic Commissioner, no evidence was submitted, and the hearing went ahead.

The Traffic Commissioner said it was clear and obviously accepted by the operator/transport manager (in view of their guilty pleas in the criminal court) that the offences referred to at the public inquiry brief, were committed by them. The Traffic Commissioner continued that those offences were offences of dishonesty and deliberate acts of falsifying safety inspection records relating to commercial vehicles with intent to deceive the DVSA. At the inquiry, the operator/transport manager suggested that these offences were committed due to them panicking. However, the Traffic Commissioner did not accept that from the evidence of the text message and that they were committed over a prolonged period. The transport manager later admitted to the DVSA that they had been undertaking their own inspections to save money. Additionally, the transport manager failed to notify the Traffic Commissioner of their convictions within 28 days, as required by the condition of their operator’s licence.

Summing up

The Traffic Commissioner considered all the circumstances, and a period of disqualification was necessary. Furthermore, the Traffic Commissioner stated that the protection of the public and fairness to other operators required them to be disqualified. They continued that this was a severe case involving dishonesty by falsification of safety inspection records, so the Traffic Commissioner decided to disqualify the operator from holding or obtaining an operator licence for a period of five years.

The operator also lost their repute as transport manager and must be disqualified from acting as such. The Traffic Commissioner concluded that if the operator wished to be appointed as a transport manager in the future, they must appear before a Traffic Commissioner to determine whether their repute should be restored. The Traffic Commissioner was satisfied that the call to PI had prompted the directors and the transport manager to reflect on their approach and would serve as a sufficient reminder of the standards expected.